The "uniparty", benefits, public choice and political history

Talk of a "uniparty" aggravated me. Then I recalled I used to say, "Vote Labservative for same." What does history and public choice tell us about parties, their intentions and their actions in power?

Is there a uniparty?

After 14 years in Parliament – often opposing my own side and almost always opposed by Labour and the Liberal Democrats – being told I have been complicit in a “uniparty” has been deeply aggravating. Then I recalled I would say privately, “Vote Labservative for same,” in the years running up to my election...

With Labour now echoing on benefits what the Conservatives were saying in 2010, and with the distance which comes from losing my seat, I am asking if there’s truth in the uniparty thesis. Are they all the same? What can the political history of my lifetime tell us? And what about public choice theory, the study of how politicians respond to incentives?

I’ll canter through the political history of my lifetime, since 1971, then consider whether the incentives politicians face create the impression of a uniparty.